RE: [platform-core-dev] Build questions

["Lott, Jeremiah" <jeremiah.lott@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

FYI - This builder behavior also causes problems for me.  It particular,
we would like to respond to an AUTO_BUILD request differently than an
INCREMENTAL_BUILD or a FULL_BUILD.  However the code that Alex mentions
changes the "kind" flag that is passed to my builder.  Therefore even
when it is really an AUTO_BUILD, my builder sometimes gets the
FULL_BUILD flag and therefore performs the wrong operation.  It would be
nice if you could leave the decision to change the flag up to each
builder individually.

  Jeremiah

-----Original Message-----
From: Alex Chapiro [mailto:achapiro@xxxxxxx] 
Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2004 5:49 PM
To: platform-core-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [platform-core-dev] Build questions


<beginning of message snipped>
...


 I'm blaming in my troubles the following lines of code from 
BuildManager.basicBuild(...) method:

lastBuiltTree = currentBuilder.getLastBuiltTree();
// If no tree is available we have to do a full build
if (!clean && lastBuiltTree == null)
   trigger = IncrementalProjectBuilder.FULL_BUILD;

in case 1) lastBuildTree is always null after CLEAN_BUILD (see below in 
the same method:
if (clean || currentBuilder.wasForgetStateRequested()) {
    currentBuilder.setLastBuiltTree(null);

In case 2) lastBuildTree is null after forgetLastBuildState calling.

Build manager should provide framework for other builders 
implementations. I don't understand why it instead of being transparent 
for user commands implements some hidden undocumented and unmodifiable 
behavior.
Of course I realize that maybe I provide a wrong interpretation. I'd be 
happy if either I will be corrected or any work around will be advised.

Sorry for the long and messy explanation of the problem.

Thanks.


_______________________________________________
platform-core-dev mailing list
platform-core-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-core-dev